On Wed, 2016-09-14 at 11:21 +0200, Abou Al Montacir wrote: > Hi Holger, > > On Tue, 2016-09-13 at 17:08 +0000, Holger Levsen wrote: > > > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 04:15:54PM +0200, Abou Al Montacir wrote: > > > > > > Control: reopen -1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, I don't think that the best way to solve this issue is > > > > > to close the > bug. > > > > > > it seems you haven't realized two things: > > - the "general" pseudo package is mostly useless > Yes really? I don't agree here. It just pops issues that users can't > affect, but > there are real issues > > > > > - when Ben closed this bug he gave a pointer to another bug which > basically is the same issue *and* a much better bug report. You > completly failed to reply to *that*. > Yes that seems very close to the current problem, but is concerning a > particular > linux image that I'm not using. [...] I don't think it is specific to that particular version and configuration. The kernel's failure to charge DRM buffer allocations to a task is a long-standing bug. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Computers are not intelligent. They only think they are.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part